Xabier Galindez-Ibarbengoetxea1, Igor Setuain2,3, Robinson Ramírez-Velez4, Lars L Andersen5,6, Miriam González-Izal2, Andoni Jauregi1,7, Mikel Izquierdo2. 1. International School of Osteopathy, Bilbao, Spain. 2. Department of Health Sciences, Public University of Navarra, Navarra, Spain. 3. Clinical Research Department, Orthopaedic Surgery and Advanced Rehabilitation Centre, Spain. 4. Centre for Studies on Measurement of Physical Activity, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, D.C, Colombia. 5. National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark. 6. Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. 7. University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While both manipulative treatment and physical exercises are used to treat cervical pain, it remains unclear which is most effective. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term effects of high-velocity, low-amplitude manipulation techniques (MT) with those of home-exercise (HE) with stretching and low-intensity (10% of max) isometric contractions on pain and function. METHODS: Single-blind randomized clinical trial was performed. A total of 27 asymptomatic subjects were randomly assigned to 2 groups: manipulation techniques (MT, n= 13) and home exercise (HE, n= 14). The visual analogue scale (VAS); neck disability index (NDI); pressure pain thresholds; cervical spine range of motion and electromyography during the cranio-cervical flexion test was measured before and one week after the intervention. RESULTS: After the intervention, both groups showed improved (P< 0.05) NDI and VAS scores and flexion in both rotation ranges compared with the pre-intervention values. For the NDI, pain intensity, and neck flexion, the effects sizes were large; for the majority of the other measurements, the effect sizes were small to moderate. The MT group showed significantly better results than the HE group for 2 out of 17 tests. CONCLUSIONS: Both interventions improved function and pain after one week, with only marginal between-group differences in favor of MT.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: While both manipulative treatment and physical exercises are used to treat cervical pain, it remains unclear which is most effective. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term effects of high-velocity, low-amplitude manipulation techniques (MT) with those of home-exercise (HE) with stretching and low-intensity (10% of max) isometric contractions on pain and function. METHODS: Single-blind randomized clinical trial was performed. A total of 27 asymptomatic subjects were randomly assigned to 2 groups: manipulation techniques (MT, n= 13) and home exercise (HE, n= 14). The visual analogue scale (VAS); neck disability index (NDI); pressure pain thresholds; cervical spine range of motion and electromyography during the cranio-cervical flexion test was measured before and one week after the intervention. RESULTS: After the intervention, both groups showed improved (P< 0.05) NDI and VAS scores and flexion in both rotation ranges compared with the pre-intervention values. For the NDI, pain intensity, and neck flexion, the effects sizes were large; for the majority of the other measurements, the effect sizes were small to moderate. The MT group showed significantly better results than the HE group for 2 out of 17 tests. CONCLUSIONS: Both interventions improved function and pain after one week, with only marginal between-group differences in favor of MT.
Authors: Carlos Gevers-Montoro; Benjamin Provencher; Martin Descarreaux; Arantxa Ortega de Mues; Mathieu Piché Journal: Front Pain Res (Lausanne) Date: 2021-10-25